Compare & Contrast – #4

In Glen Eira contracts awarded under tender are invariably decided behind closed doors via the in camera provisions of council meetings. Residents are not even always provided with information as to the outcome of these tenders. Not only does Glen Eira not provide any information on WHY and HOW the tenders are awarded, nor why company ‘A’ was successful as opposed to company ‘B’, but the performance criteria themselves are kept secret, the officers involved are secret, and the voting is secret.

We’ve reported previously on how other councils go about their tender decisions. Many publish full accounts of the companies involved; the scores they achieved against the criteria, and the individuals involved. Further, these are published in full in council agendas and minutes. Glen Eira maintains its cloak of secrecy.

This recent tender from Monash council caught our eye for several reasons. Readers should note the following:

The relative speed with which flooding issues have been addressed, and

Related

14 Responses to “Compare & Contrast – #4”

The secrecy with which council operates is worse than ever. Which leads me to ask Councillor Pilling what has happened to the election promise which got you into council. Remember? A promise of OPENNESS, TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY. Fail! Fail! Fail!

Pilling! Ha, Ha, he joined the liberal partly, and does what he is told by his Lib mates, it save himself having to think …. as to his promises, he is open to his lib mates, he is transparent to his lib mates, and he is accountable to the CEO, no promises broken there

Not sure it’s true to say he’s become a reactionary. The question that needs answering though is whether he’s ditched his Green credentials in favour of expediency. Know many who had high hopes but who are bitterly disappointed. If he stood as an independent come next election he’d be voted out.

CECC won’t publish any info on contract details and other financial things, as do other councils as a matter of course or for matters of transparency or both. (MODERATORS: sentence deleted) Or as Lipshutz says other councils strive to be like GE. Mr propaganda

Included in the above article is a ploy (ie. which foregoes undertaking an objective assessment either of an individual development or the cumulative impact of the development and surrounding previously approved developments) that Councils employ when it comes to deciding to approve/not approve developments, i.e. “councils deliberately allow VCAT to decide on projects to avoid blame”. This politically motivated ploy basically involves Council either
. rejecting the development proposal or
. failing to meet the notification requirements applicable to the development or
. amending the proposal (eg. deleting storeys or applying setbacks requirements) with conditions that are not supported by the planning scheme).
The known to Council end result is that the developer goes to VCAT which overturns Council’s decision.

While VCAT deserves significant blame in its own right, over many years years (both before and after the zone implementation) Glen Eira has become an expert in setting VCAT up as the fall guy. If the Age had analysed the number of times the ploy has been used by individual Councils, I have no doubt that once again Glen Eira would have lead the pack.

unlimited growth is a myth fostered onto us by the big end of town, the people who are reaping huge personal wealth from all this development.

they fly 1600 people into Melbourne a week to keep their rental returns high, and the housing market to their advantage.

the big end of town have turned our Governments into pathetic cheers squad to serve their greed, our taxes now subsidise their every whim, whilst we are told time and time again by the dominate press outlets we cannot have any worthwhile public infrastructure, we cannot afford hospital, schools, or aged care. To carry off this scam they have set up extreme right wing think tanks funded “by you know who” the big end of town again to make everyone believe there is only one choice and that’s development at all costs.

You have to ask where will these profiteers be when the wheels fall off this unsustainable charade, not here in Melbourne I bet you that.

“Clay Lewis” Is Melbourne an intense place? Nowhere near intense enough for planners and architects” article is a weak and lazy summation of a Laissez-faire capitalism running wild in our cities, inflated by billions of dollars of ill gotten wealth for the booming but highly corrupt third world economies, that cannot trust there own bubble markets, so they flood others to hedge there bets.

While I would have phrased it differently, I agree that increased immigration and opening up the Aust. economy to foreign investment has caused a raft of problems. However, that being so, it does not excuse those at the local level (Council) failing to live up to the electoral obligations of representing the local community.

As an objector to the Alma Club development (we lost) and with a close rel living in Penang Street (yet to be decided but coming soon), both Clay Lucas and Anonimuss hit the nail on the head re Council using VCAT as a patsy. Gonna be interesting to compare the in chamber Council arguments for rejecting Penang vs. Council’s arguments at the VCAT hearing.